A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

I have previously described a model for how original space (space prior to the first appearance of forces) could have transitioned from a more self-compatible (than our present space) point-oscillational space, to a universal ether, composed of vibrational (as derived from the oscillational) elemental ether units. -The "point"- oscillational space had a shimmering property, with oscillational-reciprocity distance-parameters which were not infinite, so that the spatial "points" were finite - unimaginably tiny, but finite, leading to similarly tiny elemental ether units.

Oscillational fatigue had been what had led adjacent points of space to fall together, in a Yin-and-Yang fashion. The point-pairs then would have had to reversibly re-equilibrate with the initial oscillating space setting, which, by reverting to singleton point-units, were now out-of-synch with the oscillations, breaking the perfect "points" symmetry of space, and this produced a vibrational-ether setting.

The ether units being elemental, were uniform and identical, which produced perfectly-linear interactions between them, as their outward vibrations formed transient, or "loose," connections. Then, further linear interactive resonances produced entrainments of multiple units. -This kind of energy setting cannot even be imagined from our present quantum-atomic perspectives, in that they were etherically super-refined, and very intense. This "ether world" could have included monopole elements, which are one-way, dynamically. In such a setting, a cognitive, conscious Entity could have arisen. This could have led to mental manipulation of the ether forces, in order to optimize the surroundings, for existence purposes.

This kind of model would have it that there existed (and still exists) a universal unstructured background ether-matrix, out of the entrainments of which larger energy units, up to the scale of quantum-atomic structural units were formed. -This kind of model would represent the only good model for phenomena like quantum entanglement, as an example.

Our familiar quantum energy systems operate via mechanisms like spin, waves, and vectors. Such mechanisms cannot explain linear phenomena like light and electricity. -The perfectly linear interactions between first-causal elemental units would be where the linearity of quantum phenomena is actually coming from.

This model would have it that an earlier ether-world preceded our atomic-structured world, and that non-random, or creational, forces were at work. The underlying reason for creating a transition to a quantum atomic-structured world would have been to have a more magnetically-stable macrocosmic setting for entities to exist in.

The concept that non-random creational factors led to our world involves the question "what happened to all the antimatter that, according to experimental physics, should have annihilated all the matter as soon as it appeared?"

Physics, which adheres to a random "Big Bang" universe, addresses this question with a hypothesis that "somehow" "slightly more matter" existed, than antimatter, but this hypothesis lacks experimental data. Experimental physics indicates that matter and antimatter would have exactly matched each other.

I submit that non-random creational forces were at work in designing the atomic world out of the preceding ether, and shunted the antiparticles out of the way, as a necessary step in forming our world.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4257
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by surreptitious57 »

Michael MD wrote:
The concept that non random creational factors led to our world involves the question what happened to all the
antimatter that according to experimental physics should have annihilated all the matter as soon as it appeared?

Physics which adheres to a random Big Bang universe addresses this question with a hypothesis that somehow slightly more
matter existed than antimatter but this hypothesis lacks experimental data. Experimental physics indicates that matter and
antimatter would have exactly matched each other
Were matter and anti matter to exactly cancel each other out this would create a permanent state of absolute nothing. But it can
only exist for an infinitesimal period of time. And this is why quantum fluctuations are continually popping in and out of existence
as a result of the borrowing and releasing of energy
Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

The concept behind my model of ether energy having been manipulated, or mentally-channeled creationally, in order to produce particle matter, while being able to shunt antimatter out of the way, would hinge on the related concept of my model that etheric energy is tremendously more powerful than the quantum forces. That is because there would be an almost unimaginably large number of individual elemental-ether energy-units in a given volume of space, than quantum-scale units, which are vastly larger in size. So the ether could have been used to manipulate the much-less-energic matter and antimatter, and to select-out the antimatter.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Terrapin Station »

Space isn't anything like an independent substance or a container for anything to be in. Space supervenes on the extension of matter.
Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

In my origin-model, Original Space was free of forces, which made it differ from our present space. That is not to say that original space was any kind of "substance." In my model first-causal space was more self-compatible (being free of forces) than space is now, and shimmered, or oscillated, which led to oscillational fatigue, of adjacent elemental points, relative to more-distant oscillation-points, of space itself.

Oscillational fatigue is know to occur in metals, but inasmuch as metallic oscillational fatigue is a quantum process, it can't be directly correlated with the oscillational fatigue in original space. -The key to the scenario in my model being the first-causal mechanism would be that the original perfect symmetry of space was broken after Yin-and-Yang point-pairs reversibly reverted to singleton "points," out of synch with the original oscilllational-points setting of space.

As far as your remark about matter and space being related to each other, in the random-causation sense, that would be analogous to Einsteinian relativity, which views matter as inducing "curvature of space," which in turn causes matter to move gravitationally. -That's a model that doesn't entertain the existence of an ether.

I claim my model makes more sense, not only for first-causation, but also, for example, if you consider the phenomenon of quantum entanglement. In my model, quantum units are made up of elemental ether units, and thus "quantum entangled" units have retained the ability to vibrationally resonate with the background-ether, which is composed of elemental ether units.

In my model, quantum entanglement just represents radiated packets of etheric energy which have the same vibratory pattern, such as a matching frequency of vibration. Elemental ether units are the only actual participants in this phenomenon, with the quantum units being "walled off" kinetically, like cool "arms" of a quiet, purring, mechanism.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Terrapin Station »

The problem is that it doesn't make any sense to say that space can exist "on its own"
Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

It makes more sense than saying anything (like matter) just exists without a model for its origin. No, space had to come first.
Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

Even if you were to cite physics theories about Higgs bosons creating matter, you'd still have to account for where Higgs bosons came from. -There had to be a starting point - space itself.
Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

For anyone interested, I have a Web Page. To find it, enter the parent site and title:

John Chappell Natural Philosophy Society
"Ether, the Only Path to Unifying Cosmic Forces"
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by attofishpi »

Michael MD wrote:Physics, which adheres to a random "Big Bang" universe, addresses this question with a hypothesis that "somehow" "slightly more matter" existed, than antimatter, but this hypothesis lacks experimental data. Experimental physics indicates that matter and antimatter would have exactly matched each other.

I submit that non-random creational forces were at work in designing the atomic world out of the preceding ether, and shunted the antiparticles out of the way, as a necessary step in forming our world.
From what i have read - matter and anti-matter decay at different rates - hence there remains matter.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4257
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by surreptitious57 »

Absolute nothing can only exist for an infinitesimal period of time due to quantum
fluctuations which is the reason why there is always more matter than anti matter
Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

The absence of antimatter in the universe is a great unsolved problem in present-day physics.

Antiparticles are known to bind together. -In my "creational ether" model, this property of antimatter would have been involved in a creational, volitional, shunting of antiparticles away from particle matter during the act of creating the universe. Ether forces were vastly more powerful than quantum particle forces (due to their smaller size and vastly greater number of energy units), and this could have been applied to mentally differentially-shunt antimatter away from matter in forming the universe.

One way to conceptualize an accumulation and shunting of one kind of particle (here, the antiparticles during creation) would be to think of fluxing like-units in the ether matrix, and how they could follow a like-path through the ether, if subjected to powerful external mentally-directed ether forces.
Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

In this ether/quantum creation scenario, elemental ether units acted first via vibration/electrically, on the newly-generated "quantum" antiparticles, similar to the way they act on quantum units in quantum entanglement. -Then antiparticles grouped together and aggregated, directed toward an "out of the way" site, via the mechanical "like particles-like pathway" mechanism, as just described above.
Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

To clarify how my model of the ether generally works, and how both of the above mechanisms would operate - how vibrational resonance between elemental ether units acts on quantum particles or antiparticles, and how quantum particles (or antiparticles) would travel through the ether matrix, congregating like-to-like, I could give another example, from cosmology.

When an old star has lost a lot of its internal energy, it is destroyed. The violence of the destruction may be enough to erase all atomic "signatures" in the star system. The atomic constituents revert to individual protons, neutrons, and electron quantum-units.

In my ether model, the way this would work would be that the protons would aggregate like-to-like, into a new star, or Nova, based on the protons' similar size, and therefore similar pathways through the ether matrix. -The electrons would also aggregate like-to-like, and travel into space as gamma rays and other cosmic rays, and the neutrons would similarly aggregate, into a new neutron star. The neutron star then would travel away from the Nova region, toward neutronic attractors farther out in space, based on the etheric resonances the elemental building-blocks of the neutrons would have through the ether toward other neutrons, similar to the way quantum units resonate with each other, via the ether, in quantum entanglement

Wherever this ether model is applied, it provides a clearer picture.
Michael MD
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: A Challenge to the "Big Bang" Type of World-View

Post by Michael MD »

I think it might make my model of the ether clearer if I describe how it works for a problem area in physics, namely the phenomenon of Quantum Entanglement (QE)

In QE, it's observed that when a closely related pair of quantum units (sub atomic particles) are separated, they continue to behave as though they are in intimate contact with each other, even though the separation covers a great distance. There is no agreement in physics on how to explain this phenomenon.

In the ether model given above, underlying our perceptible quantum-atomically structured world, there exists an unstructured ether matrix composed of a sea of elemental units. These elemental units were derived from an oscillatory First World, in which elemental "points" oscillated, so that the ether units derived from it act vibrationally, via the formation of "loose" connections between elemental ether units, as their outward vibrations come into contact. Entrainments of multiple elemental ether units form larger units, up to the scale of quantum/atomic units.

In our perceptible world, quantum forces are mediated by spin, vector, and wave mechanisms. With the ether model, however, the quantum units we observe were built up from elemental ether units, and therefore they would retain the ability to interact (resonate) with elemental units of the underlying ether matrix (in addition to having the spin/vector/wave mechanisms we are able to observe.) -Thus, in QE, two closely-related quantum units separated in space would still be able to interact with each other, vibrationally, through the ether.

I submit that the only kind of model that can rationally account for QE is the kind of ether model described above, with Quantum Entanglement representing radiated packets of etheric energy which have the same vibratory pattern. Elemental ether units are the only actual participants in this phenomenon, with the two quantum units "walled off" kinetically, like cool "arms" of a quiet, purring, mechanism.

If this model is the correct one, physics is due for radical rethinking, and concepts such as "there is no ether," " The Big Bang," and others, should be changed.
Post Reply